PDA

View Full Version : Redskins-I was a little worried but...



DCJAM
09-01-2006, 02:59 PM
I was a little worried when I first saw the schedule and noticed we were playing the Redskins opening day on National Television.
But I'm now relieved watching them during the pre-season.
Boy do they suck!!


How badly are we goin' 2 CRUSH THEM!!!!?????

27-3?

:)

spikecyrus
09-01-2006, 03:18 PM
we will win that game, by small margine and low score,
prediction-17-13

Mr Anderson
09-01-2006, 03:20 PM
Preseason means NOTHING! NOTHING!



NOTHING!


Last time the Redskins went 0-4 in the preseason, they won the Super Bowl.

whackthepack
09-01-2006, 03:24 PM
I think the Skins are a playoff caliber team and will be above 500 this year but will not start the season 1 - 0 as the Vikes win this game 24 to 13!

Skol Vikes!

Odin VAVikefan
09-01-2006, 03:26 PM
One of my best buds is a Skins fan, and we're going to get together for the game. I had told him that with the Skins looking strong in the offseason and with all the changes the Vikes were going through that I felt Minnesota had a very small chance of winning (I posted the same sentiments here). However, I now think the Vikes have a better shot!

I know, preseason is only preseason, but players on the field don't (or shouldn't) go less than 100% on any given play, and the Redskins 1st string offensive and (oh so tough) defense have been outscored 87-17. No offensive touchdowns whatsoever. THEY HAVE MAJOR PROBLEMS, and aside from the shaky QB corps, none of these problems are obvious or easily fixable. Gibbs made a major mistake by holding what I've heard was the most relaxed training camp in the NFL as a reward to his players who went to the Voluntary workouts, and the Foreskins will be paying the price through the first half of the season.

DarrinNelsonguy
09-01-2006, 03:28 PM
When do they get Portis back?

Benet
09-01-2006, 03:30 PM
I'm still hesitant to predict we'll win this. I'll be a LOT more comfortable once I've seen a stable running-game from us. That being said, I have more than enough confidence in Brad Johnson to believe that if it's on his shoulders, he'll carry us. I also have huge confidence in our defence to chew up any QB's that are unfortunate enough to stand in front of them at the snap, but I'm still wary of the threat from Clinton Portis, even with a bum shoulder.

We'll see.. I'll be rooting for the Vikes and waking the neighbours tho! (Monday Night Football comes on at about 1am-2am over here) :D

Newman
09-01-2006, 03:34 PM
i happen to know for a fact that the vikes will win this game by three touchdowns.
dont ask me how i just do.

DCJAM
09-01-2006, 03:34 PM
i just cheecked online and saw their expecting Portis back for this game.
Still no worries, I suspect he's still hurt--from his knee right?
Look, Portis is all they got.
If he's not playin' at his prime then this will be a massacare for them. >:(

CCthebest
09-01-2006, 03:38 PM
How many time do I have to say this. Win-loss in preseason means nothing, but preseason does have some meaning. Its gives you an idea of how good the O and D-Lines are, its shows which rookies really wanna play, and itd plays a huge part in who gets cut.

spikecyrus
09-01-2006, 03:43 PM
newman
3 TDs ..............OK, I hope your right, but I'll settle for winning by one point

tiersius
09-01-2006, 03:44 PM
I say, if we win the time of possesion, we win the game. If they're running the ball well - watch out. Either way I think it will be close.

whackthepack
09-01-2006, 04:13 PM
"Benet" wrote:


I'm still hesitant to predict we'll win this. I'll be a LOT more comfortable once I've seen a stable running-game from us. That being said, I have more than enough confidence in Brad Johnson to believe that if it's on his shoulders, he'll carry us. I also have huge confidence in our defence to chew up any QB's that are unfortunate enough to stand in front of them at the snap, but I'm still wary of the threat from Clinton Portis, even with a bum shoulder.

We'll see.. I'll be rooting for the Vikes and waking the neighbours tho! (Monday Night Football comes on at about 1am-2am over here) :D



Benet you get a break this year!
The Viking & Skin's game is the early game in the new double header format that ESPN is using so it is a 7:00pm Eastern game and should be on at midnight in London.

Slade
09-01-2006, 04:31 PM
The Redskins have again amassed a roster of overpaid, underachievers. They will not make the playoffs this year. Brunell is too inconsistent, Portis is fragile, the WR's are crap (except for S Moss) & the defense is decent (S Taylor is a stud tho). The only thing that could turn them around is the coaching staff. Gibbs is good, but Saunders & Williams are brilliant. However, I do not expect much from the 'Skins

ejmat
09-01-2006, 04:35 PM
"Newman" wrote:


i happen to know for a fact that the vikes will win this game by three touchdowns.
dont ask me how i just do.


That's it.
Now I'm convinced that we will kill them (sarcasm).


As many people have said preseason scores mean nothing.
Last year the Colts were 0-4.
Please stop using preseason as a prediction for the regular season.
The fact is I hope we do win big.
I hate nail biters.
Reality is I think the Redskins will be strong especially with Portis in the lineup.
I think they lost a little on defense and that hurts them.
The reason why I do feel comfortable with this game is BJs know-how to manage the game clock and our defense seems to be clicking.
My prediction is Vikings 20 - Redskins 13

fasn8u
09-01-2006, 04:56 PM
Yeah well the last time the VIKES went 2-1-1 in preseason they went to the Super Bowl too!!!!!!


I could be mistaken on that, let me check my stats book.......
LOL!!!!!

Benet
09-02-2006, 06:56 AM
"whackthepack" wrote:


"Benet" wrote:


I'm still hesitant to predict we'll win this. I'll be a LOT more comfortable once I've seen a stable running-game from us. That being said, I have more than enough confidence in Brad Johnson to believe that if it's on his shoulders, he'll carry us. I also have huge confidence in our defence to chew up any QB's that are unfortunate enough to stand in front of them at the snap, but I'm still wary of the threat from Clinton Portis, even with a bum shoulder.

We'll see.. I'll be rooting for the Vikes and waking the neighbours tho! (Monday Night Football comes on at about 1am-2am over here) :D


Benet you get a break this year!
The Viking & Skin's game is the early game in the new double header format that ESPN is using so it is a 7:00pm Eastern game and should be on at midnight in London.


Sweet! That'll do nicely.

NordicNed
09-02-2006, 07:45 AM
I'm excited for the season to begin, and I think it's great we get to kick-off the season with a Monday Night Football game.





My only concern is, we haven't been a great away road team in recent history...




Hopefully the new coaches and players can turn it up a notch for our away games this season...




I'm going to predict a very close game with Longwell nailing the winning field goal with 3 mins left in the game, then our D shuting them down....




Vikes 20
Skins 17

vaoutlaws2006
09-02-2006, 06:51 PM
"DCJAM" wrote:


i just cheecked online and saw their expecting Portis back for this game.
Still no worries, I suspect he's still hurt--from his knee right?
Look, Portis is all they got.
If he's not playin' at his prime then this will be a massacare for them. >:(
well allow me to retort. Portis is all they have. allow me to refresh you memory on this one...they have this wide reciever i think he goes by the name of SANTANA MOSS, they have this other guy name randel el and portis is all they have. You better re think that one my friend.

GonnaBeatYouOn911
09-02-2006, 07:28 PM
as a skins fan (not trying to sound cocky) the only way i see us losing is if Portis is out/brunell sucks/defense can't stop chester taylor. I think chester will have a big game but you guys look a little shabby on WR, and run D. Portis (if healthy) will have a huge game. However i still think it will be close Skins 17-14

MaddenVodkaAddict
09-02-2006, 08:08 PM
"GonnaBeatYouOn911" wrote:


as a skins fan (not trying to sound cocky) the only way i see us losing is if Portis is out/brunell sucks/defense can't stop chester taylor. I think chester will have a big game but you guys look a little shabby on WR, and run D. Portis (if healthy) will have a huge game. However i still think it will be close Skins 17-14


Good evening, sir.
Love your user name by the way...kind of.

skum
09-02-2006, 08:16 PM
"MaddenVodkaAddict" wrote:


"GonnaBeatYouOn911" wrote:


as a skins fan (not trying to sound cocky) the only way i see us losing is if Portis is out/brunell sucks/defense can't stop chester taylor. I think chester will have a big game but you guys look a little shabby on WR, and run D. Portis (if healthy) will have a huge game. However i still think it will be close Skins 17-14


Good evening, sir.
Love your user name by the way...kind of.


Yeah, but still a shame he cant use it after 9/11.. he'll have to change it..

Also remember running against Big Phat Pat Williams, is not easy..

GonnaBeatYouOn911
09-02-2006, 08:28 PM
well may not be on this site much after 911 but Big Phat Pat ain't got nothin on C PO. Santana will have to light u up if he finds a way to stop him any way :) well as long as they don't call WD-40 an illegal substance when we use it to loosen brunells ancient joints

ejmat
09-04-2006, 01:13 PM
"GonnaBeatYouOn911" wrote:


well may not be on this site much after 911 but Big Phat Pat ain't got nothin on C PO. Santana will have to light u up if he finds a way to stop him any way :) well as long as they don't call WD-40 an illegal substance when we use it to loosen brunells ancient joints


Hey 911.
welcome to the forum and thanks for your input.
I think the Skins can be a threat this year.
The question is can Brunnell still get people the ball consistently.
You have the weapons in Moss, Randle El and Lloyd.
A great RB in Portis.
Just wondering which Brunnell will show.
Also, I think losing Arrington is big on defense.
If I recall correctly, they didn't do to well last year without him and did pretty good with him.


Time will tell.
I still say Vikings win 20-13

i_bleed_purple
09-04-2006, 01:35 PM
it should be a good game no doubt.
but i do like what i've seen from them in preseason and if its ANY indicator of how they'll play in regular season, then we should be able to win this one.

a little stat i dug up, i know its only preseason but interesting still, the vikings led the league in Points given up with only 43
and 70 Points For.
the 'skins however have a league low 27 points for, and second worst 104 points agains, (beaten out by the one and only packers)

if htats any indicator at all, they should be an easy team at least at the beginning of the season.

TheMalcolmConnection
09-04-2006, 03:18 PM
"DCJAM" wrote:


i just cheecked online and saw their expecting Portis back for this game.
Still no worries, I suspect he's still hurt--from his knee right?
Look, Portis is all they got.
If he's not playin' at his prime then this will be a massacare for them. >:(


I thought they had Pro Bowler Santana Moss. I also thought they had Chris Cooley who had better stats than Pro Bowler Jason Witten. I remember they also had a Pro Bowler in Chris Samuels at left tackle. Remember, a team just doesn't drop from being 10-6 to being total crap. It'll be a close game, but there's no way [barring injury] that the Vikings should win this one. Even though you closed out the season at 9-7, four of those wins were versus the Lions and the Packers, so I would temper my expectations a bit. Sure, Lloyd is unproven, but we all know about Randle El, so I wouldn't be so quite to label the Skins without weapons.

PurplePeopleEaters
09-04-2006, 03:29 PM
"TheMalcolmConnection" wrote:


"DCJAM" wrote:


i just cheecked online and saw their expecting Portis back for this game.
Still no worries, I suspect he's still hurt--from his knee right?
Look, Portis is all they got.
If he's not playin' at his prime then this will be a massacare for them. >:(


I thought they had Pro Bowler Santana Moss. I also thought they had Chris Cooley who had better stats than Pro Bowler Jason Witten. I remember they also had a Pro Bowler in Chris Samuels at left tackle. Remember, a team just doesn't drop from being 10-6 to being total crap. It'll be a close game, but there's no way [barring injury] that the Vikings should win this one. Even though you closed out the season at 9-7, four of those wins were versus the Lions and the Packers, so I would temper my expectations a bit. Sure, Lloyd is unproven, but we all know about Randle El, so I wouldn't be so quite to label the Skins without weapons.


Why not? Brunnell isn't a great QB and never was. Portis will be coming back from injury, if he even plays. That right there is enough to boost the vikings to a win if they play a good game. I don't see how you can say there's "no way" that the vikes can win as if it's out of the realm of possibility. You say that we all know about randle el? What do we know about him? That he's a reciever that can throw on a trick play reverse... since when has he been an actual recieving threat, or anything better than a 3rd reciever? Regardless, It should be a good game, but the same goes for you. Dont be so quick to label the vikings. All of our weapons are in less rewarding positions such as the offensive and defensive lines and defensive secondary.

TheMalcolmConnection
09-04-2006, 04:16 PM
"PurplePeopleEaters" wrote:


"TheMalcolmConnection" wrote:


"DCJAM" wrote:


i just cheecked online and saw their expecting Portis back for this game.
Still no worries, I suspect he's still hurt--from his knee right?
Look, Portis is all they got.
If he's not playin' at his prime then this will be a massacare for them. >:(


I thought they had Pro Bowler Santana Moss. I also thought they had Chris Cooley who had better stats than Pro Bowler Jason Witten. I remember they also had a Pro Bowler in Chris Samuels at left tackle. Remember, a team just doesn't drop from being 10-6 to being total crap. It'll be a close game, but there's no way [barring injury] that the Vikings should win this one. Even though you closed out the season at 9-7, four of those wins were versus the Lions and the Packers, so I would temper my expectations a bit. Sure, Lloyd is unproven, but we all know about Randle El, so I wouldn't be so quite to label the Skins without weapons.


Why not? Brunnell isn't a great QB and never was. Portis will be coming back from injury, if he even plays. That right there is enough to boost the vikings to a win if they play a good game. I don't see how you can say there's "no way" that the vikes can win as if it's out of the realm of possibility. You say that we all know about randle el? What do we know about him? That he's a reciever that can throw on a trick play reverse... since when has he been an actual recieving threat, or anything better than a 3rd reciever? Regardless, It should be a good game, but the same goes for you. Dont be so quick to label the vikings. All of our weapons are in less rewarding positions such as the offensive and defensive lines and defensive secondary.


I must not have made it clear in my other posts how much I respect the offensive and defensive lines. I also must not have made it clear that barring injury, the Redskins are a superior team in most aspects of the game, in addition to playing at home where they only lost one game last year. Of course anything can happen, but I think the Redskins just have too many weapons. Portis might not find room to run, but he'll surely find room to take a screen pass to the house against your LBs.

Vikes_King
09-04-2006, 04:28 PM
one thing i think we should all be able to agree on is that this game will definatly be one to watch, (as are most of the vikings games this season..tough schedual), the skins do have a lot of skill on offense, but like said brunell is a big question mark (even though people say the exact same thing about johnson)

im still leaning to the vikes on this one, but then again, when dont i?

Potus2028
09-04-2006, 04:32 PM
well..
we could always pull out a win like we did in ney york last year

int TD
kr TD
pr TD

IpartyWithSmoot
09-04-2006, 04:45 PM
"Mr" wrote:


Preseason means NOTHING! NOTHING!



NOTHING!


Last time the Redskins went 0-4 in the preseason, they won the Super Bowl.


False.

Portis got injured. That carrys over to the regular season.

ejmat
09-04-2006, 04:46 PM
"TheMalcolmConnection" wrote:


"PurplePeopleEaters" wrote:


"TheMalcolmConnection" wrote:


"DCJAM" wrote:


i just cheecked online and saw their expecting Portis back for this game.
Still no worries, I suspect he's still hurt--from his knee right?
Look, Portis is all they got.
If he's not playin' at his prime then this will be a massacare for them. >:(


I thought they had Pro Bowler Santana Moss. I also thought they had Chris Cooley who had better stats than Pro Bowler Jason Witten. I remember they also had a Pro Bowler in Chris Samuels at left tackle. Remember, a team just doesn't drop from being 10-6 to being total crap. It'll be a close game, but there's no way that the Vikings should win this one. Even though you closed out the season at 9-7, four of those wins were versus the Lions and the Packers, so I would temper my expectations a bit. Sure, Lloyd is unproven, but we all know about Randle El, so I wouldn't be so quite to label the Skins without weapons.


Why not? Brunnell isn't a great QB and never was. Portis will be coming back from injury, if he even plays. That right there is enough to boost the vikings to a win if they play a good game. I don't see how you can say there's "no way" that the vikes can win as if it's out of the realm of possibility. You say that we all know about randle el? What do we know about him? That he's a reciever that can throw on a trick play reverse... since when has he been an actual recieving threat, or anything better than a 3rd reciever? Regardless, It should be a good game, but the same goes for you. Dont be so quick to label the vikings. All of our weapons are in less rewarding positions such as the offensive and defensive lines and defensive secondary.


I must not have made it clear in my other posts how much I respect the offensive and defensive lines. I also must not have made it clear that barring injury, [b]the Redskins are a superior team in most aspects of the game, in addition to playing at home where they only lost one game last year. Of course anything can happen, but I think the Redskins just have too many weapons. Portis might not find room to run, but he'll surely find room to take a screen pass to the house against your LBs.


Superior team??????
Huh????
C'mon now.
I agree the Skins have a better WR corps and one better RB but other than that I don't think so.
Brunell has never proven much.
He has his streaks but he's never been consistent.
The front lines are what wins ball games and let's face it the Skins OL leaves a little to be determined.
I really don't know much about their defense but I do know they were never that great without Arrington.
Better in some positions...Yes.
Superior...I don't think so.

vikingbill50
09-04-2006, 04:49 PM
i would like to know why he thinks we have a sabby wide reciever group, i for one will take 3 or 4 really good veteran wide recievers instead of just having 1 high priced one tha tis usually over paid anyways...taylor, robinson, williamson, wiggins and pinkston, you call that shabby....i dont...

IpartyWithSmoot
09-04-2006, 06:46 PM
"vikingbill50" wrote:


i would like to know why he thinks we have a sabby wide reciever group, i for one will take 3 or 4 really good veteran wide recievers instead of just having 1 high priced one tha tis usually over paid anyways...taylor, robinson, williamson, wiggins and pinkston, you call that shabby....i dont...


Its okay. You need someone that can create seperation. That was our problem at the beginning of last year. Maybe Troy will come on and we will dominate.

muchluv4smoot
09-04-2006, 07:40 PM
Should be a very interesting way to start the season for us and also start the Childress Era. I am looking forward to seeing how we play on the road under Childress. That is something we were downright pathetic at under Tice. The only real big road win I can think of under Tice, is beating the Giants last year and that took an Int for a TD, a punt return TD and a kickoff for a TD.

A good sign that we have a good head coach here is how the team preforms in the tough road games. We will get a good idea of what we have right away in week 1.

Expect a low scoring, hard hitting, defensive battle. Whoever has the edge running the ball, should get the win. If Portis is out, I think we can definitely win that battle.

VAKirks
09-04-2006, 08:45 PM
"Odin" wrote:


One of my best buds is a Skins fan, and we're going to get together for the game. I had told him that with the Skins looking strong in the offseason and with all the changes the Vikes were going through that I felt Minnesota had a very small chance of winning (I posted the same sentiments here). However, I now think the Vikes have a better shot!

I know, preseason is only preseason, but players on the field don't (or shouldn't) go less than 100% on any given play, and the Redskins 1st string offensive and (oh so tough) defense have been outscored 87-17. No offensive touchdowns whatsoever. THEY HAVE MAJOR PROBLEMS, and aside from the shaky QB corps, none of these problems are obvious or easily fixable. Gibbs made a major mistake by holding what I've heard was the most relaxed training camp in the NFL as a reward to his players who went to the Voluntary workouts, and the Foreskins will be paying the price through the first half of the season.


Just so long as they don't decide to solve these issues and take it out on us

Foreskins is a new one on me... that is funny.

VAKirks
09-04-2006, 08:51 PM
I think the opening series and the opening quarter will go far in this one.
Tough camp versus easy camp.
New crew versus old crew.
How quickly can the Vikes begin to communicate on the field, live, and for real.
I think that's are biggest hurdle, ourselves.
Too many people in brand new roles.

Vikes 17
Skins 10

PurplePride80
09-04-2006, 09:24 PM
I just got done reading the first 4 pages of this thread and almost everyone thinks were going to win this game.
:o

I'm not trying to be negative, but I don't see us winning this game, even if Portis isn't 100%.

I know they played HORRIBLE in pre-season, but the Redskins are loaded with talent on both sides of the ball.

They have one of the best offensive lines in the NFC. ( Chris Sameuls, Randy Thomas, Jon Jansen)

Although he's not 100%, they have one of the best running backs in the NFL. (Portis)

And most importantly, we have been a poor road team for a long time. :(



Now if Clinton Portis dosen't play like himself, or if he dosen't play at all, then we might win this game. But with how bad we've been on the road in the past few years, I just don't see us beating the Redskins. :(

AmishGangsta
09-04-2006, 10:32 PM
Hello, Skins fan checking in here, I wish you guys the best of luck with no injuries.

I have to clear one thing up,though, because this theory is false.

"The Redskins have never been good without Arrington"

The Skins have had a top ten defense the last 2 years (it may even be top 5), and Arrington was hurt in 2005, and he sat on the bench almost the entire 2006 season.

Arrington wasn't the reason for the defenses success - it was Gregg Williams.

It being the first game of the season, in a new system, you can expect the Skins' offense to come out looking like they did week 1 against the bears last year, however, based on the past 2 years, that defense is gonna come out roaring, especially at fed ex, and if I were you guys, that's what I would be worried about, that and the noise, it gets very loud at fedex - especially since Joe Gibbs came back.

Back to the defense - in the playoffs, our offense put up the worst offensive production in the history of the league, and the defense still won the game.

That being said, the Vikings are a brand new team! New systems and brand new coaches.
So they have some kinks to work out aswell.

With the Vikings lack of talent at the WR position, (this should be a very unpopular belief, but just go ahead and compare them to other teams around the league) I see the skins almost completley shutting down the running game and winning a very close defensive ball game.

I'm sure that's not quite the view most of you guys have in mind, but we'll find out on Monday.
I'll check back in, afterwards.

ultravikingfan
09-04-2006, 11:37 PM
"AmishGangsta" wrote:


Hello, Skins fan checking in here, I wish you guys the best of luck with no injuries.

I have to clear one thing up,though, because this theory is false.

"The Redskins have never been good without Arrington"

The Skins have had a top ten defense the last 2 years (it may even be top 5), and Arrington was hurt in 2005, and he sat on the bench almost the entire 2006 season.

Arrington wasn't the reason for the defenses success - it was Gregg Williams.

It being the first game of the season, in a new system, you can expect the Skins' offense to come out looking like they did week 1 against the bears last year, however, based on the past 2 years, that defense is gonna come out roaring, especially at fed ex, and if I were you guys, that's what I would be worried about, that and the noise, it gets very loud at fedex - especially since Joe Gibbs came back.

Back to the defense - in the playoffs, our offense put up the worst offensive production in the history of the league, and the defense still won the game.

That being said, the Vikings are a brand new team! New systems and brand new coaches.
So they have some kinks to work out aswell.

With the Vikings lack of talent at the WR position, (this should be a very unpopular belief, but just go ahead and compare them to other teams around the league) I see the skins almost completley shutting down the running game and winning a very close defensive ball game.

I'm sure that's not quite the view most of you guys have in mind, but we'll find out on Monday.
I'll check back in, afterwards.


Hey, welcome to the site.

We welcome any opponents fans to the site.
Its nice the chat with sensible fans instead of the ones who come in with nothing on their plates but obscenities.

ejmat
09-04-2006, 11:44 PM
"AmishGangsta" wrote:


Hello, Skins fan checking in here, I wish you guys the best of luck with no injuries.

I have to clear one thing up,though, because this theory is false.

"The Redskins have never been good without Arrington"

The Skins have had a top ten defense the last 2 years (it may even be top 5), and Arrington was hurt in 2005, and he sat on the bench almost the entire 2006 season.

Arrington wasn't the reason for the defenses success - it was Gregg Williams.

It being the first game of the season, in a new system, you can expect the Skins' offense to come out looking like they did week 1 against the bears last year, however, based on the past 2 years, that defense is gonna come out roaring, especially at fed ex, and if I were you guys, that's what I would be worried about, that and the noise, it gets very loud at fedex - especially since Joe Gibbs came back.

Back to the defense - in the playoffs, our offense put up the worst offensive production in the history of the league, and the defense still won the game.

That being said, the Vikings are a brand new team! New systems and brand new coaches.
So they have some kinks to work out aswell.

With the Vikings lack of talent at the WR position, (this should be a very unpopular belief, but just go ahead and compare them to other teams around the league) I see the skins almost completley shutting down the running game and winning a very close defensive ball game.

I'm sure that's not quite the view most of you guys have in mind, but we'll find out on Monday.
I'll check back in, afterwards.


Welcome to the forum.
Iappreciate your input and you make valid points.
I do agree that The Redskins have had good defenses over the last couple of years but the breakdowns of the season were when Arrington was out.
I agree that it will be a hard hitting game and should be low scoring.
I totally agree with you regarding our WR corps vs. other NFL teams.
What you really should look at is this offense doesn't need that star talent.
they need WRs that catch the ball and can run after the catch.
It's the WCO.
Short passing plays to TEs and RBs.
We have a great TE duo in Kleinsasser and Wiggins.
We have a RB that's great out of the backfield.
We now have WRs that can spread the field in Williamson and Pinkyboy.
Skins defense will not be able to stack 8 kin the box and hound the run.
BJ controls the tempo of the game very well and is consistent doing so.
With Brunell, you nevr know what you're going to get.
You probably have one of the best WR corps in football (if not the best).
Portis is probably top 5 RB.
It's Brunell I question.
If the Vikings can stop your run game Brunell will have trouble getting the ball to the WRs.
That's where your other weapon comes in.
Cooley.

in any case, it will be a hard fought game and like you said hopefully no injuries to either team.
To the people that keep stressing Portis' injury, just because he was injured doesn't mean he will still be injured.
Many players come in and play with an injury and have great games.
So we need not count on that.

Braddock
09-05-2006, 12:10 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"AmishGangsta" wrote:


Hello, Skins fan checking in here, I wish you guys the best of luck with no injuries.

I have to clear one thing up,though, because this theory is false.

"The Redskins have never been good without Arrington"

The Skins have had a top ten defense the last 2 years (it may even be top 5), and Arrington was hurt in 2005, and he sat on the bench almost the entire 2006 season.

Arrington wasn't the reason for the defenses success - it was Gregg Williams.

It being the first game of the season, in a new system, you can expect the Skins' offense to come out looking like they did week 1 against the bears last year, however, based on the past 2 years, that defense is gonna come out roaring, especially at fed ex, and if I were you guys, that's what I would be worried about, that and the noise, it gets very loud at fedex - especially since Joe Gibbs came back.

Back to the defense - in the playoffs, our offense put up the worst offensive production in the history of the league, and the defense still won the game.

That being said, the Vikings are a brand new team! New systems and brand new coaches.
So they have some kinks to work out aswell.

With the Vikings lack of talent at the WR position, (this should be a very unpopular belief, but just go ahead and compare them to other teams around the league) I see the skins almost completley shutting down the running game and winning a very close defensive ball game.

I'm sure that's not quite the view most of you guys have in mind, but we'll find out on Monday.
I'll check back in, afterwards.


Welcome to the forum.
Iappreciate your input and you make valid points.
I do agree that The Redskins have had good defenses over the last couple of years but the breakdowns of the season were when Arrington was out.
I agree that it will be a hard hitting game and should be low scoring.
I totally agree with you regarding our WR corps vs. other NFL teams.
What you really should look at is this offense doesn't need that star talent.
they need WRs that catch the ball and can run after the catch.
It's the WCO.
Short passing plays to TEs and RBs.
We have a great TE duo in Kleinsasser and Wiggins.
We have a RB that's great out of the backfield.
We now have WRs that can spread the field in Williamson and Pinkyboy.
Skins defense will not be able to stack 8 kin the box and hound the run.
BJ controls the tempo of the game very well and is consistent doing so.
With Brunell, you nevr know what you're going to get.
You probably have one of the best WR corps in football (if not the best).
Portis is probably top 5 RB.
It's Brunell I question.
If the Vikings can stop your run game Brunell will have trouble getting the ball to the WRs.
That's where your other weapon comes in.
Cooley.

in any case, it will be a hard fought game and like you said hopefully no injuries to either team.
To the people that keep stressing Portis' injury, just because he was injured doesn't mean he will still be injured.
Many players come in and play with an injury and have great games.
So we need not count on that.


Yeah Amish, whatcha gonna do with that?! :)

AmishGangsta
09-05-2006, 12:57 AM
Welcome to the forum.
Iappreciate your input and you make valid points.
I do agree that The Redskins have had good defenses over the last couple of years but the breakdowns of the season were when Arrington was out.
I agree that it will be a hard hitting game and should be low scoring.
I totally agree with you regarding our WR corps vs. other NFL teams.
What you really should look at is this offense doesn't need that star talent.
they need WRs that catch the ball and can run after the catch.
It's the WCO.
Short passing plays to TEs and RBs.
We have a great TE duo in Kleinsasser and Wiggins.
We have a RB that's great out of the backfield.
We now have WRs that can spread the field in Williamson and Pinkyboy.
Skins defense will not be able to stack 8 kin the box and hound the run.
BJ controls the tempo of the game very well and is consistent doing so.
With Brunell, you nevr know what you're going to get.
You probably have one of the best WR corps in football (if not the best).
Portis is probably top 5 RB.
It's Brunell I question.
If the Vikings can stop your run game Brunell will have trouble getting the ball to the WRs.
That's where your other weapon comes in.
Cooley.

in any case, it will be a hard fought game and like you said hopefully no injuries to either team.
To the people that keep stressing Portis' injury, just because he was injured doesn't mean he will still be injured.
Many players come in and play with an injury and have great games.
So we need not count on that.

Well, you talk about how your offense doesn't need any stars on its team to have success in 2006, and then then you go on to say that the Redskins defense won't be the same without a star like LaVar Arrington, who barely played the last 2 years.
The fact that your offense can be successful without a star at receiver in their new system, has yet to be proven.
But what has been proven - is the fact that the Skins' defense can be successful without LaVar Arrington.

I don't know where your getting your stats, but they are incorrect. In fact, the skins never had a winning season when Arrington was on the field and completely healthy.


In 2004, Arrington played 4 games, and the Redskins had the #4 overall best defense, http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2004.php

You said that the Skins' defense suffered last year after the loss of Arrington, the fact is, he was a backup for almost the entire year, and he contributed a whole 39 tackles to the defense; difference maker? Maybe he got some cheers from the fans, but his stats were anything but impressive; the Redskins D was rated in the top five, again, without him.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2005.php

Gregg Williams was the one who turned that defense around, by bringing in team guys, and getting rid of the drama (LaVar Arrington).

We had our breakdown at the end of the season when we lost James Thrash and David Patten, and teams starting paying all of the attention to Moss.
I'm not sure which breakdown your talking about in 2005, but the D did struggle a little bit when Cornelius Griffin went down.

Maybe it's my burgundy and gold glasses, but if Portis were to sit out, I think the Skins have some of the best depth in the NFC at RB: CP, Ladell Betts, T.J Duckett

ejmat
09-05-2006, 01:10 AM
"AmishGangsta" wrote:



Welcome to the forum.
Iappreciate your input and you make valid points.
I do agree that The Redskins have had good defenses over the last couple of years but the breakdowns of the season were when Arrington was out.
I agree that it will be a hard hitting game and should be low scoring.
I totally agree with you regarding our WR corps vs. other NFL teams.
What you really should look at is this offense doesn't need that star talent.
they need WRs that catch the ball and can run after the catch.
It's the WCO.
Short passing plays to TEs and RBs.
We have a great TE duo in Kleinsasser and Wiggins.
We have a RB that's great out of the backfield.
We now have WRs that can spread the field in Williamson and Pinkyboy.
Skins defense will not be able to stack 8 kin the box and hound the run.
BJ controls the tempo of the game very well and is consistent doing so.
With Brunell, you nevr know what you're going to get.
You probably have one of the best WR corps in football (if not the best).
Portis is probably top 5 RB.
It's Brunell I question.
If the Vikings can stop your run game Brunell will have trouble getting the ball to the WRs.
That's where your other weapon comes in.
Cooley.

in any case, it will be a hard fought game and like you said hopefully no injuries to either team.
To the people that keep stressing Portis' injury, just because he was injured doesn't mean he will still be injured.
Many players come in and play with an injury and have great games.
So we need not count on that.

Well, you talk about how your offense doesn't need any stars on its team to have success in 2006, and then then you go on to say that the Redskins defense won't be the same without a star like LaVar Arrington, who barely played the last 2 years.
The fact that your offense can be successful without a star at receiver in their new system, has yet to be proven.
But what has been proven - is the fact that the Skins' defense can be successful without LaVar Arrington, I can't believe you're even arguing this.

I don't know where your getting your stats, but they are incorrect. In fact, the skins never had a winning season when Arrington was on the field and completley healthy.


In 2004, Arrington played 4 games, and the Redskins had the #4 overall best defense, http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2004.php

You said that the Skins' defense suffered last year after the loss of Arrington, the fact is, he was a backup for almost the entire year, and he contributed a whole 39 tackles to the defense; difference maker? Maybe he got some cheers from the fans, but his stats were anything but impressive; the Redskins D was rated in the top ten again, without him.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2005.php

Gregg Williams was the one who turned that defense around, by bringing in team guys, and getting rid of the drama (Stars like Fred Smoot, LaVar Arrington).

We had our breakdown at the end of the season when we lost James Thrash and David Patten, and teams starting paying all of the attention to Moss.
I'm not sure which breakdown your talking about in 2005, but the D did struggle a little bit when Cornelius Griffin went down.

Maybe it's my burgundy and gold glasses, but if Portis were to sit out, I think the Skins have some of the best depth in the NFC at RB: CP, Ladell Betts, T.J Duckett

That's right.
I forgot they had Duckett.
Good pick up.
I can't sit here and argue with you because the Skins are your team and you know more about them than I ever will.
What I was referring to regarding the defense was last year during the middle of the season when Arrington was out (or barely playing) it seemed like the Skins were losing.
In fact, I think you guys were 2 and 6 during a span of eight games.
Maybe I'm wrong but I'm thinking it was about the time Arrington didn't play.
As far as stats are concerned, they don't tell the entire picture.
His reputation causes teams to run and throw opposite of where he is positioned.
That's just my opinion.
You can't take away his talent.
I'm not going to sit here a argue your points.
Like I stated, you watch them a lot more than I.
I thought that during that span, he wasn't playing much.
If I'm wrong I apologize and I will stand corrected.

AmishGangsta
09-05-2006, 01:40 AM
That's right.
I forgot they had Duckett.
Good pick up.
I can't sit here and argue with you because the Skins are your team and you know more about them than I ever will.
What I was referring to regarding the defense was last year during the middle of the season when Arrington was out (or barely playing) it seemed like the Skins were losing.
In fact, I think you guys were 2 and 6 during a span of eight games.
Maybe I'm wrong but I'm thinking it was about the time Arrington didn't play.
As far as stats are concerned, they don't tell the entire picture.
His reputation causes teams to run and throw opposite of where he is positioned.
That's just my opinion.
You can't take away his talent.
I'm not going to sit here a argue your points.
Like I stated, you watch them a lot more than I.
I thought that during that span, he wasn't playing much.
If I'm wrong I apologize and I will stand corrected.



LaVar wasn't playing much at all.
He was used sparringly here and there on third down situations.
But I can see how you could get that idea - the media kind of throws the idea out there.
He's hurt again believe it or not.

Anyway, goodluck on Monday

DCJAM
09-05-2006, 11:17 AM
"AmishGangsta" wrote:



That's right.
I forgot they had Duckett.
Good pick up.
I can't sit here and argue with you because the Skins are your team and you know more about them than I ever will.
What I was referring to regarding the defense was last year during the middle of the season when Arrington was out (or barely playing) it seemed like the Skins were losing.
In fact, I think you guys were 2 and 6 during a span of eight games.
Maybe I'm wrong but I'm thinking it was about the time Arrington didn't play.
As far as stats are concerned, they don't tell the entire picture.
His reputation causes teams to run and throw opposite of where he is positioned.
That's just my opinion.
You can't take away his talent.
I'm not going to sit here a argue your points.
Like I stated, you watch them a lot more than I.
I thought that during that span, he wasn't playing much.
If I'm wrong I apologize and I will stand corrected.



LaVar wasn't playing much at all.
He was used sparringly here and there on third down situations.
But I can see how you could get that idea - the media kind of throws the idea out there.
He's hurt again believe it or not.

Anyway, goodluck on Monday


You're crazy, LaVar changed the hole game when he was on the field.
He is an inhuman monster and you know he made other offenses scared.
I only watched a few games, but whenever he was in, he would be right there where the ball was.
It didn't matter what the coverage was, he would drop out of his assignment and totally try to kill the guy with the ball.


That's HEART.
And that's what the redskins lost when Arrington left.


I can't wait to see him totally walk off the field carrying redskins helmits when you guys go up to New York.

Zeus
09-05-2006, 12:17 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


Welcome to the forum.
Iappreciate your input and you make valid points.
I do agree that The Redskins have had good defenses over the last couple of years but the breakdowns of the season were when Arrington was out.

Pardon me if I respectfully disagree.
Lavar Arrington is still living on the reputation he made at Penn State.
Since I lived 2 miles from Redskins Park, I've probably watched a few more Redskins games over the past couple years than most of you all.
And what I saw was a LB (when he was healthy enough to play) who was consistently out of position and not maintaining his responsibilities.
Sure it looks great if you run down a RB to make a tackle - but if that RB was free because you weren't were you were supposed to be (as was the case with Lavar) then the highlight will only look good to the dopes on SportsCenter, not to the coaches in the film room.
Hence the healthy benchings which Lavar took last year.

Simply put - Lavar is THE most overrated player in the NFL - even moreso than Ron Mexico.

=Z=

Del Rio
09-05-2006, 12:38 PM
I would feel very confident in saying the skins will not be beating us to the outside, they will not have success with screens and sweeps and the TE (although I like him alot because I coached against him and went to a football camp with him) will not be allowed many YAC on passes under 5 yards. The speed of our defense and the design of the Tampa 2 will at the very least put our players in position to make the plays.

The keys to this game are going to be the same as every game. We cannot let Mark sit in the pocket. Their WR core while they trump them to being the best around, are not. BUT if we allow time for them to run their routes they will eat up our zone. The Tampa 2 has major flaws downfield, and it relies on pressure from stunts and blitzes to not allow the QB time to read through his progressions.

I am not worried about the run game, I am not worried about the short game. The big thing in this game for us as a team is to get pressure on Mark, plain and simple.

Turnovers, special teams play, penalties. Each one has the potential to be game breakers in this game. Not much room for error for the Vikings or the Skins.

ejmat
09-05-2006, 12:53 PM
"AmishGangsta" wrote:



That's right.
I forgot they had Duckett.
Good pick up.
I can't sit here and argue with you because the Skins are your team and you know more about them than I ever will.
What I was referring to regarding the defense was last year during the middle of the season when Arrington was out (or barely playing) it seemed like the Skins were losing.
In fact, I think you guys were 2 and 6 during a span of eight games.
Maybe I'm wrong but I'm thinking it was about the time Arrington didn't play.
As far as stats are concerned, they don't tell the entire picture.
His reputation causes teams to run and throw opposite of where he is positioned.
That's just my opinion.
You can't take away his talent.
I'm not going to sit here a argue your points.
Like I stated, you watch them a lot more than I.
I thought that during that span, he wasn't playing much.
If I'm wrong I apologize and I will stand corrected.



LaVar wasn't playing much at all.
He was used sparringly here and there on third down situations.
But I can see how you could get that idea - the media kind of throws the idea out there.
He's hurt again believe it or not.

Anyway, goodluck on Monday


Amish,
It is true about the media and highlights.
They only show good plays and don't mention much about what he didn't do.
The one thing I will respectfully disagree with you on is the coaching staff making the decisions to "get rid" of the problems such as Smoot and Arrington.
The reason why I disagree is they left on their own terms.
Smoot left as a FA and Arrington paid money back to become a FA.
That happens to caoches good or bad.
I honestly don't think he had a lot to do with the decision making there.

AW.
Thanks for your input too.
Nice to see that from a Viking fan as well as a Skins fan.
I can't debate when I don't see the actual games.
I now have a new light on Arrington.

Mr. Purple
09-05-2006, 12:58 PM
"Del" wrote:


I would feel very confident in saying the skins will not be beating us to the outside, they will not have success with screens and sweeps and the TE (although I like him alot because I coached against him and went to a football camp with him) will not be allowed many YAC on passes under 5 yards. The speed of our defense and the design of the Tampa 2 will at the very least put our players in position to make the plays.

The keys to this game are going to be the same as every game. We cannot let Mark sit in the pocket. Their WR core while they trump them to being the best around, are not. BUT if we allow time for them to run their routes they will eat up our zone. The Tampa 2 has major flaws downfield, and it relies on pressure from stunts and blitzes to not allow the QB time to read through his progressions.

I am not worried about the run game, I am not worried about the short game. The big thing in this game for us as a team is to get pressure on Mark, plain and simple.

Turnovers, special teams play, penalties. Each one has the potential to be game breakers in this game. Not much room for error for the Vikings or the Skins.





Exactly you took the words outta my mouth.And that right there is why I think we will win the game, our D-line.I dont wanna sound like a homer, but we have a very strong defensive line.Credit so does Washington, but I truley beleive ours is better.We need to get to Brunell and dissrupt his game.I think we can and I think we will.Its gonna be a close game and its gonna come down to who dosnt make the most mental mistakes.Dumb penalties and such, and turnovers.Protect the ball.All in all it should be a great game! GOod luck to both teams!

AmishGangsta
09-06-2006, 10:13 AM
I actually took that comment about smoot out, because I forgot which message board I was on :) Honestly I wasn't trying to incite anyone, and I was kind of like thinking to myself "wait a minute, Smoots on the Vikings - I had better take that part out. :)

Actually, I liked Smoot when he was here, the only thing I didn't like about him, was it seemed he would get banged up on every tackle; he would always get praised for playing with an injury, I just felt that he shouldn't get injured in the first place.

Redskins fans didn't want to lose Smoot, however, things happen for a reason, for whatever reason, I don't think the coaching staff wanted him here for the money he was asking.

AmishGangsta
09-06-2006, 10:18 AM
You're crazy, LaVar changed the whole game when he was on the field.
He is an inhuman monster and you know he made other offenses scared.
I only watched a few games, but whenever he was in, he would be right there where the ball was.
It didn't matter what the coverage was, he would drop out of his assignment and totally try to kill the guy with the ball.


That's HEART.
And that's what the redskins lost when Arrington left.


I can't wait to see him totally walk off the field carrying redskins helmits when you guys go up to New York.


I don't know which LaVar you've been watching these last two years, he's been a backup for the Redskins because of injury problems and the inability to follow assignments.

He does make a impact, but the Redskins D has been in the top5 the last two years in a row, so obviously either Gregg Williams is a good coach, or LaVar Arrington was being a difference maker from the sidelines.

The fact is, LaVar hasn't been on the field enough to make to much of an impact.

Del Rio
09-06-2006, 10:24 AM
"AmishGangsta" wrote:


I actually took that comment about smoot out, because I forgot which message board I was on :) Honestly I wasn't trying to incite anyone, and I was kind of like thinking to myself "wait a minute, Smoots on the Vikings - I had better take that part out. :)

Actually, I liked Smoot when he was here, the only thing I didn't like about him, was it seemed he would get banged up on every tackle; he would always get praised for playing with an injury, I just felt that he shouldn't get injured in the first place.

Redskins fans didn't want to lose Smoot, however, things happen for a reason, for whatever reason, I don't think the coaching staff wanted him here for the money he was asking.


He would always get hurt because he doesn't tackle properly. I'm sure you noticed that watching him throw his body around all those years. I agree with you though he shouldn't be getting hurt in the first place.

He still has the bad tendencies, in fact his bruised ribs came off a horrible tackle. I wish your coaches would have learned him better before we picked em up :)

ejmat
09-06-2006, 12:38 PM
"Del" wrote:


"AmishGangsta" wrote:


I actually took that comment about smoot out, because I forgot which message board I was on :) Honestly I wasn't trying to incite anyone, and I was kind of like thinking to myself "wait a minute, Smoots on the Vikings - I had better take that part out. :)

Actually, I liked Smoot when he was here, the only thing I didn't like about him, was it seemed he would get banged up on every tackle; he would always get praised for playing with an injury, I just felt that he shouldn't get injured in the first place.

Redskins fans didn't want to lose Smoot, however, things happen for a reason, for whatever reason, I don't think the coaching staff wanted him here for the money he was asking.


He would always get hurt because he doesn't tackle properly. I'm sure you noticed that watching him throw his body around all those years. I agree with you though he shouldn't be getting hurt in the first place.

He still has the bad tendencies, in fact his bruised ribs came off a horrible tackle. I wish your coaches would have learned him better before we picked em up :)


I agree with the both of you.
Smoot reminds me a lot of Deion Sanders when he tackles.
The differrence is he normally actually hits someone.
His poor tackling skills lead to injuries.
IMO Emitt Smith did the same thing.
He alsways acted like he was injured when the Cowboys were in jeopardy of losing.
Then he was praised for playing injured.

Prophet
09-06-2006, 12:47 PM
"ejmat" wrote:

...IMO Emitt Smith did the same thing.
He alsways acted like he was injured when the Cowboys were in jeopardy of losing.
Then he was praised for playing injured.

Yeah, that's probably why he's listes in the Top 10 Playing With Pain Moments (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/scorecard/10/19/top10.playing.with.pain/index.html).
8)

PurplePeopleEaters89
09-06-2006, 12:49 PM
i think it will be a high scoring game!! but we will win!!

actually i hope it isn't a high scoring game!! i have either the NY Giants defense or the Vikings defense, and i dont want to play the Giants against the Colts!!!

AmishGangsta
09-06-2006, 01:02 PM
So back to my point,

From one football fan to another, and not from a Skins' fan to a Vikes' fan standpoint - I wouldn't put to much stock in the departure of LaVar Arrington being a factor in progress of the defense; the Skin's also upgraded at safety (Adam Archuleta) and at pass rusher (Andre Carter, DE that can also rush as a linebacker, who is capable of double digit sacks; a major upgrade over an injured Arrington anyday- in my opinion.

The defense is the strong point of the team, with or without him, they're going to produce right away.

It's the offense that has all the question marks; I don't see them rolling on all cylinders until the middle of the season, and that's only if Mark Brunell can stay healthy.

Del Rio
09-06-2006, 01:06 PM
"AmishGangsta" wrote:


So back to my point,

From one football fan to another, and not from a Skins' fan to a Vikes' fan standpoint - I wouldn't put to much stock in the departure of LaVar Arrington being a factor in progress of the defense; the Skin's also upgraded at safety (Adam Archuleta) and at pass rusher (Andre Carter, DE that can also rush as a linebacker, who is capable of double digit sacks; a major upgrade over an injured Arrington anyday- in my opinion.

The defense is the strong point of the team, with or without him, they're going to produce right away.

It's the offense that has all the question marks; I don't see them rolling on all cylinders until the middle of the season, and that's only if Mark Brunell can stay healthy.


It's going to be a defensive battle then. I guess the team with the fewest mistakes will win.

Boyum
09-06-2006, 01:12 PM
Vikes 21

Skins 10

Clinton Portis get's a steady diet of Mr Udeze and Mr James
:)

vikingbill50
09-06-2006, 01:32 PM
even if portis does play, he will probably still be alittle sore asa he isnt even practicing yet form what i hear and with a couple good hits, he will be out of the game and then that leaves it up to brunell and i dont think i have to say anymore if that happens...

Boyum
09-06-2006, 01:37 PM
"vikingbill50" wrote:


even if portis does play, he will probably still be alittle sore asa he isnt even practicing yet form what i hear and with a couple good hits, he will be out of the game and then that leaves it up to brunell and i dont think i have to say anymore if that happens...


Good point-and after Mr Udeze and Mr James get done with Portis, they can hammer Brunell and hopefully he doesnt' break a hip or something.

TheMalcolmConnection
09-06-2006, 01:54 PM
Just restopping by, reading some comments about James and Udeze. I was really high on them coming out of the draft, and since I had stopped paying attention, Udeze was still developing and James didn't make a huge impact last year. Didn't see too much of them in preseason since we get local coverage here in Virginia, how were their stats? Just wondering because everyone is acting like we should be very afraid of them. I'm more worried about the interior defensive line. I don't see us having a lot of room to run
up the middle.

Vikes_King
09-06-2006, 01:59 PM
during the preseason, every time the starting D-line was in.. with the exception of a few plays, the QB was getting pressured, i'll look up their stats, but james & udeze multiple times were chasing the QB when he dumped the ball

Vikes_King
09-06-2006, 02:03 PM
read this ^_^


Kenechi Udeze and Erasmus James- Monday, the defensive ends, starters and backups were tremendous. After talking to New York Giants All-Pro and prolific sack artist Michael Strahan, the USC product and former first-round pick, Udeze, started a new training regiment, which he does with best friend and starting fellow starting end, James, also a former Vikings first-round pick. The two were explosive off the edge in the opener, constantly pressuring Raiders quarterback Aaron Brooks. If Udeze and his counterpart can continue wreaking havoc on opposing quarterbacks, the Vikings' defense that looked phenomenal Monday should continue harassing offenses around the league.

WaywardHoosier
09-06-2006, 06:51 PM
It will be interesting to see the direction that Kenechi Udeze and Erasmus James will go.
They were outstanding in college and fit the pro mold. Some players just aren't an impact during their rookie season.

If these two can put it together for the Vikings, they would be a solid foundation to build a defense around. NFL games are still won on both sides of the line.


With this year's Vikings, it has to predict the direction they will go.

The Redskins are definetly going in the right direction but they can be beaten in the first week. Portis had a significant injury that he may not have recovered from.
We will know by the end of the first quarter.

vikingbill50
09-06-2006, 11:05 PM
i think they will have an outstanding year this year as well barring any injuries, i likes what i saw in preseason when they did play together and they were awesome, always in there after the quarterback, it will be hard for any offense to double team with the front line we have in and not to mention our linebackers are really looking good too...especially henderson..i thinkwe will have alot more sacks than previous years this year